The NZ Initiative has released the first of three reports on improving teacher quality. The first one is mainly setting out where we are at, and later reports will look at potential improvements. Some highlighted facts:

NZ is a top-performing system

NZ’s 15-year-olds rank among the top performing countries in reading (7th), science (7th) and mathematics (13th)

NZ (along with Shanghai and Singapore) has the highest proportion of top readers (one in six)

But the system is not reaching everyone

NZ has one of the largest gaps in the world between high- and low-performing students

The 2009 PISA study of 15-year-olds showed NZ has one of the widest ranges of reading scores in the OECD

Māori and Pasifika students are consistently less successful than Pakeha and Asian students at all three levels of NCEA and they do not perform as well in international tests of achievement

A meta-analysis of half a million studies found teachers were the most important in-school factor for student achievement

Teacher salaries make up 61% of the education budget

NZ has good quality teachers, but we can improve in key areas

Our teachers are highly qualified – 86% hold a bachelor’s degree

But one-third of year nine mathematics teachers do not have a mathematics qualification

18% of schools say a lack of mathematics teachers hinders the ability to teach the subjectThe quality of teacher education is variable – only 57% of schools are satisfied with the quality of teacher graduates

Low expectations of Māori and Pasifika students are partly to blame for low achievement

We struggle to attract and retain talent

Despite the importance of teachers, their status in NZ is low, and has been eroded by top-down changes

Teacher morale in secondary schools slipped from 70% in 2009 to 57% in 2012

Teacher appraisal is a ‘tick the box’ exercise. It is rarely used as a tool for development and only 5% of teacher goals are related to student outcomes

There is a lack of career structure and recognition of excellence. The pay scale sends a signal that teachers have reached their maximum capability after eight years

It’s a good area for focusing on, as teacher quality is almost beyond dispute the most important factor in educational outcomes.

Related posts:

This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 9th, 2013 at 2:00 pm and is filed under NZ Politics.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.

22 Responses to “NZ Initiative on teacher quality”

A meta-analysis of half a million studies found teachers were the most important in-school factor for student achievement

I sincerely hope people reading and commenting on this thread understand the significance of the words “in-school factor” since the out-of-school factors are hugely significant to quality learning. I suspect the report will be available shortly?

The New Zealand Initiative says “Every good think tank needs solid foundations. These are ours:
• Credibility: Our research is based on a sound theoretical framework and is peer-reviewed on a routine basis.
• Empirical evidence: Our recommendations are supported by empirical, and often international, evidence.
• Non-partisanship: We engage with political parties from across the political spectrum.
• Independence: We are an organisation promoting good public policy, not the interests of individual businesses or industries.
• Commitment to New Zealand: Members and staff of the Initiative share the vision to build a better New Zealand. We believe in a prosperous, free and fair society with a competitive, open and dynamic economy.”

And then they spend their time, effort and money on reports about teacher quality. They simply could have asked Burt for deeply intellectual, reasoned, dispassionate and researched responses to their core questions!

I sincerely hope people reading and commenting on this thread understand the significance of the words “in-school factor” since the out-of-school factors are hugely significant to quality learning.

Yeah, good luck with that.

Teacher morale in secondary schools slipped from 70% in 2009 to 57% in 2012

Novopay will bear some of the responsibility, but the government gets the lion’s share. It’s spent the period under consideration decrying teacher quality (despite evidence to the contrary), loading them up with additional paper-shuffling, inflicting ideology-based experiments on them and doing its level best to undermine their unions. No morale-boosters in there.

Low expectations of Māori and Pasifika students are partly to blame for low achievement

Yep. For a fine example, look no further than the charter schools aimed at them – the ones with an emphasis on kapa haka, sports and the military.

The 13% drop in teacher morale in three years is a real concern. No employer gets good outcomes from their employees if they are not feeling valued. The government needs to urgently consult with teachers to find out their concerns and seek ways to improve morale.

An Education Minister who is not that good in her job, and who continues to use a 1 in 5 failing statistic despite it being discredited, can’t be good for morale either!

But does qualified mean effective? My late father successfully taught 9 to 11 year mathematics for 20 years following a military career and he was not qualified. He also assisted newly qualified teachers with classroom practicalities such as maintaining discipline – 6he sort of stuff they do not seem to cover in teachers college. At least two of them (both principals in due course) expressed gratitude for this years later.

I was talking to a retired US middle and high school teacher last week. He told me it was routine in the US for teachers to lack any qualification or background in the actual subjects they ended up teaching in schools.

Novopay will bear some of the responsibility, but the government gets the lion’s share. It’s spent the period under consideration decrying teacher quality (despite evidence to the contrary), loading them up with additional paper-shuffling, inflicting ideology-based experiments on them and doing its level best to undermine their unions. No morale-boosters in there.

Can anyone tell me why Year 9 maths teachers need to be qualified in maths? After all, I’d say less that 5% of Year 8 teachers are qualified in maths. The difference between Year 8 and 9 in the curriculum is minimal. I understand that the higher the students goes, the more qualified in maths you need to be… but I don’t think it’s a big deal at this stage.